About your Search

20130801
20130831
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)
, the intelligence that sparked all this was a communication from osama bin ladin's replacement, ayman al zawahiri to the head of the al qaeda arm in yemen. the terrorist leaders discussed plotting an attack to coincide with a in muslim holy day this week. this afternoon nbc news is reporting that one reason the u.s. reacted so aggressively is because al qaeda operatives said they wanted an attack that, quote, would change the balance of power in the region. well, as american counter terrorist officials are dealing with this threat, some on the right are using it to hit the president as weak on national security. big surprise there. take a look what bill kristol and former senator jim demint said this weekend on fox. >> four years ago, president obama gave a much heralded speech, his outreach to the muslim world. now four years later we're closing embassies throughout the arab world. a year ago he said al qaeda is on the run. now we seem to be on the run. i'm not criticizing the decision to close the embassies. that's probably the right thing to do for the sake of trying to save american lives and
succeeded osama bin laden zawahiri. the two men reportedly agreed that they wanted to do something big. timed to the end of the muslim holy month of ramadan which is right now. and that's what led the united states to close 19 embassies. there they are on the map and consulates in the mideast and africa. there's still a lot that remains unknown including which target. over the weekend, one thing clear from every lawmaker and official with knowledge of the attack, nobody's crying wolf here. this is one of the most serious threats in years. >> been an awful lot of hatter out there, chatter means conversations among terrorists about the planning that's going on, very reminiscent of what we saw pre-9/11. this is the most serious threat that i've seen in the last several years. >> we need to know and realize we're living in an increasingly dangerous world and this many specific threat that we've been briefed on over and over again has reached a new level. >> i must say this is probably one of the most specific incredible threats i've seen perhaps since 9/11 because of the specificity, becau
and others but it's a terrible thing that -- just a year ago, boasting al qaeda is on the run and osama bin laden is dead. now an unprecedented closure of 22 embassies. >> i'm not questioning what he's doing. i think what bill is saying is true is our attempt to placate parts of the world reset to whether it's russia or somewhere else are clearly not working. the perception of weakness in this administration is encouraging this kind of behavior. >> of course, those were extreme hawks. someone needs to tell jim demint al qaeda doesn't care what you're relationship is with russia. for more on how washington reacted, i'm joined by senior correspondent michael crowley with me and "the washington post" opinion writer jonathan capehart. i guess what's interesting here, skrungt you start, it's the quick almost rabble-rousing political hysteria. instead of joining in which was the initial impulse of people like peter cink and lindsey graham was to join forces and say we've got a unique threat coming out of yemen. orders passed from pakistan. and deal with the issue at hand. instead they reverted im
time they did this, when romney called him an apiecer, obama came out and said tell that to osama bin laden and the 15 leaders of al qaeda i've taken off the field. the notion that this guy is somehow appeasing our enemies is so preposterous. >> do you think they have polled on this, the neocons, they figure after the embarrassment of iraq, they wanted to fight the war. george w. wanted to fight it, and the vice president wanted to fight it. they all wanted to fight it. okay. they decided that we have sort of forgotten that, and now they're coming back. bolton is back, kristol is back. when they say retaliation, their idea of retaliation after 9/11, steve, was going into iraq. retaluation. what does that mean? >> i have never gotten the impression that their world views were radically altered by what happened in the last decade, after the invasion of iraq. i don't think the world view was changed. i think they sense an opportunity within the republican party, the argument in the republican party over foreign policy. whenever they see an opportunity to connect their agenda to oppositio
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)